On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 11:19:05AM -0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
>Em Fri, 17 Nov 2017 11:08:01 -0200
>Gustavo Padovan <[email protected]> escreveu:
>
>> 2017-11-17 Mauro Carvalho Chehab <[email protected]>:
>>
>> > Em Fri, 17 Nov 2017 15:49:23 +0900
>> > Alexandre Courbot <[email protected]> escreveu:
>> >
>> > > > @@ -178,6 +179,12 @@ static int vb2_queue_or_prepare_buf(struct
>> > > > vb2_queue *q, struct v4l2_buffer *b,
>> > > > return -EINVAL;
>> > > > }
>> > > >
>> > > > + if ((b->fence_fd != 0 && b->fence_fd != -1) &&
>> > >
>> > > Why do we need to consider both values invalid? Can 0 ever be a valid fence
>> > > fd?
>> >
>> > Programs that don't use fences will initialize reserved2/fence_fd field
>> > at the uAPI call to zero.
>> >
>> > So, I guess using fd=0 here could be a problem. Anyway, I would, instead,
>> > do:
>> >
>> > if ((b->fence_fd < 1) &&
>> > ...
>> >
>> > as other negative values are likely invalid as well.
>>
>> We are checking when the fence_fd is set but the flag wasn't. Checking
>> for < 1 is exactly the opposite. so we keep as is or do it fence_fd > 0.
>
>Ah, yes. Anyway, I would stick with:
> if ((b->fence_fd > 0) &&
> ...
>
0 is a valid fence_fd right? If I close stdin, and create a sync_file,
couldn't I get a fence with fd zero?
-Brian
>>
>> Gustavo
>
>
>--
>Thanks,
>Mauro
From 1584551947772359298@xxx Mon Nov 20 02:54:55 +0000 2017
X-GM-THRID: 1584155088810136583
X-Gmail-Labels: Inbox,Category Forums,HistoricalUnread